Category: Think Tank, Wages & Income

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

7 Responses to “Trends in the Distribution of Household Income Between 1979 and 2007”

  1. MikeNY says:

    IMO, wealth inequality is the biggest social, moral and political issue of our time. We need some new thinking on this. The old models are broken, and the Fed’s insistence that they still govern has caused it to become a functionally reactionary institution: widening an already egregious disparity in wealth, while doing little to generate high quality jobs for the working class, and essentially absolving Congress of its responsibility to address the issue.

    Continuing on the current path will lead to widespread political disaffection and ultimately to social instability. The dogmatic insistence that “more growth” will solve the problem is asinine, or disingenuous, when the benefits of the last 5 years of growth have accrued overwhelmingly to the top 1%. We need to figure out a way to share our economic production more justly; anyone who has a stake in this country should be very concerned about the problem.

  2. ironman says:

    Shame the CBO declined to consider what happened to the distribution of household income during the two years of the recession that began after 2007.

  3. stonedwino says:

    The first step is to raise taxes on the to tier substantially, where they were prior to Reagan, along with looking for serious solutions to taking ALL money our of politics – publicly funded campaigns – make it illegal to contribute to any politician.

    MikeNY has it right; if we don’t stem this trend immediately we will see serious social unrest and worse. The survival of the Republic is at stake.

  4. theexpertisin says:

    I wonder if there is a larger income disparity between the very top and all other strata in countries that are considered “developing” or “frontier” economies, and less disparity between income strata within economies that have matured/stagnated.

    Is it possible we are in the happy medium with both growth and so-called income disparity, which is not the worse place to be? Is there an ideal ratio of income distribution that reflects the notion of a successful nation?

  5. mle detroit says:

    The CBO report suggests:

    “The precise reasons for the rapid growth in income at the top are not well understood, though researchers have offered several potential rationales, including technical innovations that have changed the labor market for superstars (such as actors, athletes, and musicians), changes in the governance and structure of executive compensation, increases in firms’ size and complexity, and the increasing scale of financial-sector activities.”

    I am always struck by the absence of age-related data in these household income analyses, and the corollary absence of “assortive mating” as a factor: the doctor no longer marries the nurse, she or he marries another doctor. Jay-Z’s household income on his own is high; it’s a whole lot higher with Beyonce!

  6. [...] Don’t Miss: Trends in the distribution of household income between 1979 and 2007 | The Big [...]